[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170401034623.GE29622@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2017 04:46:23 +0100
From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc: Chewie Lin <linsh@...gonstate.edu>, greg@...ah.com,
forest@...ttletooquiet.net, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 001/001] drivers/staging/vt6656/main_usb.c: checkpatch
warning
On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 08:36:22PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Sat, 2017-04-01 at 04:32 +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 06:59:19PM -0700, Chewie Lin wrote:
> > > Replace string with formatted arguments in the dev_warn() call. It removes
> > > the checkpatch warning:
> > >
> > > WARNING: Prefer using "%s", __func__ to embedded function names
> []
> > Again, checkpatch warning is badly written
>
> In your opinion, what wording would be better?
MILD SUGGESTION: don't spell the function name out in format strings;
"this_function: foo is %d", n
might be better off as
"%s: foo is %d", __func__, n
in case you ever move it to another function or rename your function.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists